A direct quantification of numerical dissipation towards improved large eddy simulations
Physica D: Nonlinear Phenomena, ISSN: 0167-2789, Vol: 471, Page: 134433
2025
- 1Citations
- 1Captures
Metric Options: Counts1 Year3 YearSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Article Description
In implicit large eddy simulations (ILES), it becomes increasingly clear that numerical errors are essential to simulation accuracy. Nevertheless, whether the numerical dissipation in a CFD solver can be regarded as a means of turbulence modeling cannot be known a priori. In the present work, we propose a general method to quantify the numerical dissipation rate for arbitrary flow solvers. Unlike previous approaches in which the numerical dissipation is estimated from the perspective of kinetic energy transfer, our method focuses on direct comparisons with the SGS dissipation from explicit models. The new method is both self-contained and self-consistent, which can be applied to any numerical solver through a simple post-processing step in the physical space. We show that for two common techniques to introduce numerical dissipation (through numerical schemes and solution filtering), the quantification results help to determine if a simulation can be considered as a legitimate ILES run and provide direct guidance for designing better models. When the numerical dissipation is already significant, an improved ILES filtering approach is proposed, which reduces the native numerical dissipation and works better for low order codes. The methods are general and work well for different Reynolds numbers, grid resolutions, and numerical schemes.
Bibliographic Details
Elsevier BV
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know